Russians have found Life on the Moon since 1970!

Some deductive reasoning would almost prove that, if this is indeed fossilized bacterial / protozoic life, than it did not originate on the moon.
The moon never had an atmosphere, as it is too small to hold one. There would be no food source for any bacteria or single/ simple unicellular life
for that matter, no atmospheric oxygen, no liquid water, nothing that could sustain any form of life as we know it.

And, yes, "as we know it" certainly is the operative part of this, but if you look at the more likely possibilities, instead of trying to invent a
scenario where the moon could ever harbor any life, we really need to look no further than our own Earth as the source of this material. We know the
Earth was absolutely peppered by the same massive asteroids that produced the landscape on the moon. Since we have an atmosphere, and the processes of
weather erosion, we certainly do not look like that, but we certainly would if we did not have these factors that erase craters. In fact, we would
probably look a lot worse!

The evidence that material from the inner planets have mixed around is certainly not new. The Martian rocks that we hold in possession today, came
from this process, and from a considerable distance away. Certainly, there are Earth rocks on Mars, and elsewhere..... but especially the Moon. It
is only 250k miles distant, in our own solar orbit (obviously),,, There has to be millions of tons of Earth material on the moon.

Here is a great candidate, one that we can still see on planet Earth:

The Vredefort Crater (Africa)

The asteroid that hit Vredefort is estimated to have been one of the largest ever to strike Earth (at least since the Hadean eon some four billion
years ago). The asteroid is thought to have been approximately 5–10 km (3.1–6.2 mi) in diameter. The bolide that created the Sudbury Basin could
have been even larger. [3] The crater has a diameter of roughly 250–300 km (160–190 mi),[2] larger than the 200 km (120 mi) Sudbury Basin and the
170 km (110 mi) Chicxulub Crater. This makes Vredefort the largest known impact structure on Earth. The Vredefort Crater's age is estimated to be
2.023 billion years (± 4 million years),[1] which places it in the Paleoproterozoic era.

Source: Wikpedia

And a side note on another suspect:

If the Wilkes Land Crater in Antarctica is an impact crater, then it is the largest known at 500 km (310 mi) in diameter.

The Vredefort hit was to early proterozoic life , what Chix was to the Dinosaurs, a super snuff job that also threw rocks all over the inner solar
system. One thing about Vredefort, it was much more massive.

These are just the largest hits we know about, imagine what really happened!

What was your exact point upon replying in this thread if you honestly had nothing to add to the topic and obviously did not enjoy reading it? Just
move on with your life, we don't need your unimpressed dialogue here.

Anyway, I kind of like the theory above. That these were just lifeforms on Earth at the time of the strike that after being shipped out into the
vacuum of space became... Freeze dried for a better term and this is what's left. It would be quite interesting to actually explore the moon further
for more things like this. If this were true, it could give us a whole lot more information about the history of our planet.

The prevailing theory of moon formation is an earth strike when our planet was still a molten hell sphere. No life could have formed at that time
because the temperature and conditions were hostile even to organic molecules.

Originally posted by charlyv
. There would be no food source for any bacteria or single/ simple unicellular life for that matter, no atmospheric oxygen, no liquid water, nothing
that could sustain any form of life as we know it.

edit on 8-11-2012 by charlyv because: spelling where caught

edit on 8-11-2012 by charlyv because: (no reason
given)

edit on 8-11-2012 by charlyv because: spelling where caught

There are bacteria that live kilometres below the ground and feed off of elemental sulphur with no atmospheric oxygen available and probably never was
at that depth. geysers that boil have rare bacteria that can survive harsh extremes. I have no trouble contemplating bacteria on the moon. Btw water
is present in a frozen state on the moon and also antarctica has its own bacterial species.

Problem is an impact large enough to launch an object on a lunar trajectory would have sufficent energy
to melt the rocks and sterilize them destoying all living organisms, if not completely carbonizing them......

Problem is an impact large enough to launch an object on a lunar trajectory would have sufficent energy
to melt the rocks and sterilize them destoying all living organisms, if not completely carbonizing them......

That used to be the argument against 'Mars meteorites', since they didn't look very 'shocked' at all.

Finally it was shown that glancing impacts on an atmosphered planet would create a 'spurt' of fluids ejected at more t6han escape velocity -- and
small rock fragments could eaisly be entrained in the spurt and accelerated along with the fluids more 'gently' [hundreds of G's instead of
millions of G's] than originally thought.

The problem isn't in departure, it's in arrival. Hitting an airless planet requires all the kinetic energy to be dispelled during 'litho-braking'
-- hitting the ground. That creates deceleration forces more t6han ample to vaprozie small objects and shatter big ones.

No, it's now thought that an atmosphere at destination is also required for 'gentle' enough braking. And don't sweat the fireball -- it's only in
the outer few millimeters of the object, the rest of it doesn't have time to heat up before slowing below incandescent spped.

Now, case in point, the Moon. It's thought possible that very early on, the moon did occasionally have a tenuous and temporary atmosphere from
impacts of comets. A piece of earth-born blown-off debris arriving during such an interval, by chance, could quite easily have survived to the ground
intact.

Interesting. But, although finding microbial life on the moon is exciting, it very well may have come from earth during a large impact that blasted
tons of debris beyond our atmosphere. And microbial life that existed eons ago may not necessarily still exist on the earth today, or maybe it does
and we have yet to discover it.

Originally posted by charlyv
. There would be no food source for any bacteria or single/ simple unicellular life for that matter, no atmospheric oxygen, no liquid water, nothing
that could sustain any form of life as we know it.

edit on 8-11-2012 by charlyv because: spelling where caught

edit on 8-11-2012 by charlyv because: (no reason
given)

edit on 8-11-2012 by charlyv because: spelling where caught

There are bacteria that live kilometres below the ground and feed off of elemental sulphur with no atmospheric oxygen available and probably never was
at that depth. geysers that boil have rare bacteria that can survive harsh extremes. I have no trouble contemplating bacteria on the moon. Btw water
is present in a frozen state on the moon and also antarctica has its own bacterial species.

edit on 9-11-2012 by Bilky because: (no reason
given)

Heat is one thing, but the kind of cold on the moon is much more extreme than anything or anywhere on this earth.
I am well aware of the extremophiles of Earth, but there is nothing here that can take 100c in daylight and then swing to -180c in darkness.

Problem is an impact large enough to launch an object on a lunar trajectory would have sufficent energy
to melt the rocks and sterilize them destoying all living organisms, if not completely carbonizing them......

The interiors of transported materials , to Earth anyway, are only carbonized in the outer layers of the mass. Almost all meteorites fall cold, at
terminal velocity after the bolides explode in the upper atmosphere. We know this from Mars and Moon rocks especially, since they have pristine
interiors.

Since life of Earth seems to be from after the formation of the moon, can you indicate an event after that, that would permit panspermia (or at least
eject fossilized life to the moon?) in such a quantity that a random sample would chance to find it. Note that fossils require sedimentation and
chemical environmental degradation of the material, I doubt that any fossils, as we know them, can be created on the moon.

Problem is an impact large enough to launch an object on a lunar trajectory would have sufficent energy
to melt the rocks and sterilize them destoying all living organisms, if not completely carbonizing them......

That used to be the argument against 'Mars meteorites', since they didn't look very 'shocked' at all.

Finally it was shown that glancing impacts on an atmosphered planet would create a 'spurt' of fluids ejected at more t6han escape velocity -- and
small rock fragments could eaisly be entrained in the spurt and accelerated along with the fluids more 'gently' [hundreds of G's instead of millions
of G's] than originally thought.

The problem isn't in departure, it's in arrival. Hitting an airless planet requires all the kinetic energy to be dispelled during 'litho-braking' --
hitting the ground. That creates deceleration forces more t6han ample to vaprozie small objects and shatter big ones.

No, it's now thought that an atmosphere at destination is also required for 'gentle' enough braking. And don't sweat the fireball -- it's only in the
outer few millimeters of the object, the rest of it doesn't have time to heat up before slowing below incandescent spped.

Now, case in point, the Moon. It's thought possible that very early on, the moon did occasionally have a tenuous and temporary atmosphere from impacts
of comets. A piece of earth-born blown-off debris arriving during such an interval, by chance, could quite easily have survived to the ground intact.

Thanks for the clarification Jim, I was wondering about atmospheric breaking being a necessary part of the equation.

I would also add that a shotgun blast is a good analogy to how solid matter could be entrained in the liquefied ejecta from a big enough collision,
the expanding gasses from the gun powder ignition are travelling at a much higher velocity than the pellets which are still accelerated to a
significant velocity.

The Above Top Secret Web site is a wholly owned social content community of The Above Network, LLC.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.